Quick updates to the site, money money money edition

[danjal]

In response to post #24615349. #24615514, #24615539, #24615594, #24615744, #24615844, #24616559, #24616664, #24616684, #24616839, #24616949, #24617094, #24617659, #24617939, #24617944, #24618744, #24623334, #24624164, #24624429, #24625279, #24626674, #24627199, #24627214, #24628219 are all replies on the same post.

Axeface wrote:

Ventry wrote: Your in the minority.
You do realize this right?

CaptainGame wrote: Not the idea of people asking for money for pay that bugs me - I can easily ignore the "dollar for new sword" nonsense, and there will always be people willing to mod for love of the game... but from what I hear, A. The money split is 30% to Valve, 45% to Bethesda, and 25% to the modder, B. Modder doesn't get a thing until they make $100 (AFTER the pay split) and C. Pay is exclusively in Steam wallet credit.

This is blatantly and obviously an attempt to lure people into making DLC on the cheap.

thestoryteller01 wrote: Most people on Steam are calling Valve greedy for giving the modders only 25%, only a few spoiled brats are actually blaming the modders for anything.

But of course many say that if every contacted modder had flatly refused to participate in the trial run, we wouldn't have this mess.

dechurch wrote: "We will see more quality, better support, and better updates from modders."

You keep telling yourself that.

"very, VERY few people are going to get rich doing this. Very few. Think about this before calling people greedy."

Certainly not any modders.

sunshinenbrick wrote: "very, VERY few people are going to get rich doing this. Very few. Think about this before calling people greedy."

While I agree with what you are saying, is it not the above that is part of the problem. As a lot of people will be doing a lot of work but not sharing in most of the financial benefits, the benefits that keep a roof over our heads. The point being that it is not only modding that things like this are happening.

Full respect to you, I am just trying to bring up a point because I think this discussion really matters if we (as the consumer/content provider) are going to help Valve avoid exploiting its customers.

Axeface wrote: @Ventry. That doesn't mean I am wrong. Some would argue that it actually means I am right, because I am able to think clearly, and for myself - not just follow the screaming and shouting crowd.

Jupezus wrote: I'm just annoyed by this, Valve is advertising this as " Support the modders",
while they take 75% of the cut. That's just plain disgusting.

Ramon1 wrote: Here, aim all those passive aggressive insults towards Chesko that just now realized what's it like to deal with megacorporations like Valve or Bethesda:

I thought discussion was moderated in this place??? Doesn't matter, too few people are remotely attempting at defending this and failing hard at it.

chinkaninka wrote: It's probably Valve's way of trying to get more people to use the steam workshop... But who would actually be stupid enough to spend money on a MOD. Who's actually looked at the paid mods page? Totally not worth it. I've made a couple of crappy mods myself, and they are NOT worth paying for... The "mods" I made are the kind of thing painted all over the steam workshop. I would just download something else, preferably something worth downloading, for FREE. Oh, and to the people who agree with this, are you trolling or did you just make your claim without sufficient evidence to back it up?

Axeface wrote: @Jepezus. Totally agree, I said that at the end of my post. 75% to the corps is wrong, but this applies to basically ANYTHING creative in the world.... the creator getting screwed by the publisher. While I understand that beth made the game, and steam is selling it. The modders are being treated like the 'middle man', as if their content has little value and they are simply adding value to the main product, when they are actually content creators. They need to have a bigger cut. 50% would be acceptable. But, corporations are evil and will try to bleed everyone dry (fact).

Aquilathestne wrote: Instead of forcing eveyrone from some guy with kids to feed and a 13 yearold without a job, perhaps this should simply be a wake up call to show more respect to our mod authors and donate? the donation system would be more effective if we all considered: would i rather be forced to pay a small amount, or give a big donation to mod authors i love? phendrix says he only has had 1 donation. lets flood our favorite authors with donations on nexus. Heck, even the ones who went to steam but still have mods here. show the appreciation for free content.

t1amat wrote: http://www.pcgamer.com/fake-protest-mods-hit-the-steam-workshop/?ns_campaign=article-feed&ns_mchannel=ref&ns_source=steam&ns_linkname=0&ns_fee=0

Maruun wrote: I am more worried about the general direction.

Every modder that puts his "mod" as a buyable product isnt a modder anymore.
He is a User Generated Content creator, with a pretty bad pay.

Modding was always a community effort, creating, sharing, learning. Now money is involved. This changes everything.

Didnt we had quality mods before? Sure and we had alot of "bad" mods unfinished ect.
But that will NOT change with this paid mod thing....if at all it will get worse.

I cant argue agains modder trying to take some kind of compensation for their hard work, but a paywall?

The next thing leaving the modders aside, i hope it will only be "doom and gloom" but we know how the DLC dilemma started, is there a market they get away with it, and we know what consequences we got from that.

Now they start offering modders to be paid slaves for Beth right now its optionall, but that was of course only logical it would be to hard to DRM mods backwards. Fallout 4 is about to be announced, and its not a coincidence that this shitstorm was started before Fallout 4 was announced.

Do you really think when Beth starts monetising the work of OTHERS they will tolerate any competition? I fear we will see that Beth says again how they will "Support" modding behind a paywall were most of the profit goes to Beth after they released a buggy/shitty console port for a game that will AGAIN depend on modders to get fixed, the best part they dont even pay a single $ for the fixxed noooo even better THEY get paid and DONT even have to work for it, because "modder" no excuse UGC-Programers will push out small "mods" in order to fix a broken game in hope to get some payment...

I stop here...i just get angry when i think about it...

MrRedshark wrote: You're right. Very few people are going to get rich.

But a whole lot more people are going to get poorer.

Vault Tec wrote: Instead of insulting people, you should have spent the time reading into what is going on because from what I've just read, you're not all that clued up.

Many are angry because a lot of modders have just up stick and left the Nexus etc behind, most have also recently promised an updated version to be uploaded here and it appears on the Workshop instead, with the previously supported version being dropped without a word (Wet & Cold). There's also an issue with asset developers not being paid. A great example is the fishing mod which used Fore's idle animations. Fore was not contacted as the author was under an NDA up till yesterday and as such, was not getting paid or had even been asked if it was ok to ask for payment using his assets (there is a PCGamer article on it with screencaps of Fore saying that he was not asked). That mod has since been removed, and refunds being given out to anyone who bought it as Fore mods as a hobby, not for payment.

The "75% rumour" isn't actually a rumour _at all_.

https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/about/?appid=72850

"The percentage of revenue an item creator receives from direct sales of their item in this Workshop is 25%, as stipulated in the Supplemental Workshop Terms.."

On top of this, modders will have to meet milestones before being paid.

You mention "More quality mods", actually this has had the *opposite* effect. Now that there's an incentive for making free money, scumbags are stealing mods from the Nexus and uploading them as their own (as mentioned in the above article). It's now a matter of "Is this a mod or a cash grab?". The same story keeps happening with Greenlight, with a large chunk of recently submitted 'games' being blatant rip offs (the recent Hotline Miami clone which somehow got into the store) or are extremely obvious cash grabs with the authors having no intention to support it any further once it's in the store.

Many have used that tired and over-trodden reason "You don't have to buy it" blah blah but as a matter of fact, I may not have to buy it but I sure as hell have to navigate such cash grabs to find any potential mods I would want to buy (this is an example. I refuse to line Bethesda and VALVe's pockets off the back of someone else) which will affect legit mod authors as I will not navigate hundreds of pages of mods if page after page is 75% filled with cash grabs with no guarantee of prolonged support. While we're on the subject, since the workshop is now "unregulated", after the 24 hours guaranteed refund period is up, and I quote here, in order to get a refund I must "Politely ask the mod developer". Right so Mr. Russian who has created a cash grab (which was not obvious at first) and has broken it/been broken by another mod is guaranteed to give me my money back? Pull the other one!

Among other issues, a customer can 'buy' a mod, copy the files out of the Data folder onto another drive or another folder and request a refund. The author is now out of pocket, VALVe/Bethesda are keeping the cash and you've got a free mod with your money back. This was proved when a member of the PCMasterRace subreddit tested this and reported back that it worked. Immoral? Yes, but VALVe/Bethesda taking 75% of the takings is leagues ahead regarding being immoral versus a person copying files for 'mod piracy'.

Yes, mod developers should be given the option to be paid but most definitely not like this. The Nexus method, I feel, will be much more successful. There have been many mods I've downloaded which I've felt were very high quality and have actually donated accordingly (over £5) but a lot of pages don't have a donate option (which this update will fix) so even if I wanted to donate, it's pretty damn hard in some cases. In VALVe's case, I must buy the mod before I can even try it and think of it as being worth while which I disapprove of since a donation/payment should be earned, not given 'just because'.

Joeblivion wrote: @Axeface I have not been on the steam forums to witness, for myself, the extent of the response of the community to the actions of Valve/Beth and while I do not endorse over the top, negative responses, (ie. death threats, etc.) I can say that we cannot discredit the community's response because of the negative feedback.

We are voicing our displeasure at this move by Valve and Beth. The majority of the community supports the FREE distribution of modded content and those modders who decide that they would like to take the 'Valve' approach and try to monetize that content are telling the community of users that they value the dollar over the enjoyment of expressing creativity, dedication and skillful prowess in regards to their modded content.

Your position confuses me because in your first post, you support Valve's decision, claiming it will promote higher quality mods (which is debatable).

Yet later in your responses you go on to claim that corporations are 'evil' and ALWAYS try to suck everyone dry.

Despite this, you still support an 'evil' corporation, that is setting up an easy cash grab, that undermines the creativity of modders, short changes them for their efforts, moves us one step closer to eliminating free modding altogether, perpetuates pirating (now for mods, of all things) and is trying to remove our free exchange of content.

Monetizing modded content will not create better content. People will find ways to maximize the amount of money they make, while putting in the least amount of effort.
Don't believe me? Just follow what Beth and Valve are doing.

Beth makes 37.5% of all profits for every download, while only having to pay for a game that they developed 4 years ago and no longer support.

Valve makes 37.5% of all profits for every download, while only having to upkeep the workshop and overseeing every transaction/download.

The people actually doing any work get paid only 25% of profits made per download.

This is what happens when you put the importance of the dollar bill above the importance of creativity, community sharing, desire for prestige and passion for supporting something you love.

WightMage wrote: I'm sorry, but the movie, art, publishing, music, and even porn industry disagree with you. A monetary incentive has not, and will NOT guarantee an improvement in quality of products, because frankly, it isn't profitable. Industries are more likely to find something that is relatively stable, appeals to a wide demographic of customers, and isn't too avant garde or too boring, and milk it until they move onto the next big thing.

As an example, take the Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed franchises- these games have not innovated anything in the past few years of their development, and while CoD has become a joke meme to refer to flashy but ultumately substance less entertainment (not unlike Michael Bay's films), the last Assassin's Creed, Unity, was absolutely REAMED by both the press and customers alike for being a clunky, horribly glitched, unfinished piece of crap that was rushed out with next to know beta testing and relied on hype and diehard fans for its sales- which is exactly how it recouped costs. And Ubisoft has absolutely no incentive to make the next game any better, because they don't want to waste money on the chance their mext IP may fail.

Why do so many great and innovative mods get created? Because their authors have no financial incentive- the only incentive they have is their own personal interest to see something realized, made by themselves, for themselves. And by sharing it with other people, fellow modders either ignore it if they think its a bust, or contribute to it, FOR FREE, if they think it has potential, or think it just needs a little push in the right direction. Their incentive? Personal reasons- arguably even selfish ones, but constructive ones nonetheless.

You want to know what will REALLY happen with the paid skyrim mods page? Fancy hats. Porn skin texture mods. New weapon models which don't actually so anything except look cool. Copy and pasted mods from foreign countries that have been conveniently altered just enough that they pass as "not copywrite infringing," or otherwise stolen from unknown or smalltime modders who cannot mount a defense of their work.

Spending egregious amounts of time making massive projects would not only be unlikely, but unprofitable. In the amount of time a single mod author would spend to create such a mod and price it accordingly, they can, and would, be doing something else that makes them far more money in a shorter span of time for less risk. Like the above mentioned shovelware. That is not even considering that even if they formed into groups, dividing the profits up evenly would be a nightmare that would likely destroy inexperienced teams (and lets be honest here, most modders are amateur game developers at best, not people with at least five years experience in the field and experience working on deadlines with other strangers), which is to say, most of them. Look at kickstarter projects for games that have failed, and look at kickstarter projects for games that have succeeded the kickstarter, but failed afterward (Dysfunctional Systems). For most people in it for the money, it is simply not worth the time, or in their best interest, to make anything with a quality level beyond mediocre.

In conclusion, I am actually not against modders receiving compensation of some kind. But what people seem to forget is that they are not Sid Meier, Molyneux, or Gaben- you are not a professional, and if you were, you wouldn't be wringing your hands trying to make a living off of modding games, you would be freelancing, getting contracts, working on some indie title or already in the field. You aren't J.K.Rowling or Stephanie Meyer or Stieg Larsson- you are some kid who wrote a book in looseleaf with a number 2 pencil and think you are entitled to being paid via a vanity publishing company (look up why that's a bad thing). You aren't Christopher Nolan- you are a kid with an expensive camera that made a decent 15 minute demo reel and show some compentence with After Effects, trying to get a Hollywood commission.

You are a person who spends their free time making modifications for a game you already paid for, using tools you are under license to use, not own, using content that is NOT yours, and using other people's content that they have graciously let you have for free. So while you should certainly have some compensation of some kind, remember that ultimately you aren't anywhere near as entitled to things as you believe you are.

Signed, a struggling business owner in a different entertainment field with a similar problem.

digitaltrucker wrote: Funny how few mod authors thought they were 'entitled to compensation' before this paid model came along...seem to be more of them now.

WightMage wrote: No s#*!? That's greed for you, true greed, and not the kind of greed that actually improves things.

Deathtoheaven731 wrote: Excuse me sir, and I mean this as respectfully as I can, but you could not be more utterly wrong.

Yes, this is not the end of the world or the end of free modding. But on any other point you made you are so completely wrong that you are likely from a parallel universe where Comcast cares for its customers, EA makes games that intelligent, well-adjusted individuals enjoy, and Islamic State is a humanist, welfare organization that promotes women's rights and protects Christians from persecution.

These are VIDEO GAMES. ENTERTAINMENT. An escape from the daily stress of the world. Mods are open source creative artistic endeavors meant to expand the replayability of that entertainment media.

To endlessly monetize every aspect of video games, to take art and put it behind paywalls, is the antithesis of what video gaming is about.

We have watched video game budgets balloon to support superficial graphical improvements with nearly no improvements to actual gameplay innovation, release content carved from games in development to become paid DLC that subtracts from the value of the game but increases the price, AAA and Indie products released not only in unplayable forms upon official release dates but be complete deceptions of their gameplay demonstration videos, microtransactions that sell away challenge into oblivion....

And now we are to be nickel and dime'd for free, open source creative art that we have enjoyed for years so that content creators can sell stolen collaborative work from our community for a messily 25% cut of the earnings so maybe, just maybe they can pay rent while Bethesda and Valve trample on the communities that built them up to oppose the greedy profiteers like EA, Ubisoft, and Activision?

If the Dark0ne considers this to be abuse in anyway, then he is entitled to permaban me. I will not resent it (much). But while I abhor genuine abuse myself, I also abhor the notion that people would support the absolute, unconditional monetization, copyright, and commodification of joy and imagination. And while I will do my best, in my current state of passionate outrage (my 498 hours of Skyrim is not the most but I am a mod enthusiast at heart and a former beta tester of The Sith Lords Restored Content Mod that brought a game back from unplayability to near-completion), to remain civil, I do not begrudge those who resort to crude, language to lament and protest this most unholy disrespect to the divine spirit of PC video gaming.

I wish you well. Good day. Etc.

Deathtoheaven731 wrote: I salute this post.

pigtailsboy wrote: I would say it's a problem for modding when big mods start going to paid DLC like Wet and Cold, like Midas Magic, like iNeed. True those are big mods with authors who feel deserving enough to be compensated for their effort but they're also popular and important to the culture of modding.

I can almost feel my self shying entirely away from the idea of paid functional content. And when something like Wet and Cold has integration with mods that are not purchasable content but from a community standpoint are nearly inseparable I have to side against it.

Another thing is purchasable mods are going to cut off some people from that content. Whatever you think you're wrong. And not because a lot of us have now decided without even discussing it to boycott this content but because some of us can't afford or justify to afford even the cheapest of DLC. There in lies another problem.

Lastly we're not all of the opinion that the mod authors are greedy. That slander is directly pointed at Valve and Bethesda. And it's their entitlement to a larger portion (if suggestions are true) that will drive a higher minimum price tag on the available mods because those mod authors seek to reach that price ceiling so they can break out and start actually earning from their work.

Erinaea wrote: "
It isn't the end of the world. It isnt the end of free modding. And, it is an inevitable change. There is nothing wrong with people being able to charge for their time and talent, mods that are terrible and not worthy will not be purchased. Mods that are, will.

I for one think setting the framework for allowing people to charge for mods is a good thing overall. We will see more quality, better support, and better updates from modders. It is a natural progression and I for one am all for it."

How about this: make an option on Steam profiles for users to tick. If they want to pay for mods, they tick that option. If not, then they can download for free. You want to pay for mods? You have at it. Better yet, just donate to mod authors who have impressed you with their work..like you mentioned at the bottom of your post.

I won't even get in to the fallacious reasoning with your implicit assumptions about mods getting better and such.

People with your opinion are akin to those who are on a sinking ship and decide to grab whoever's closest and drag that person to the depths with them.

The long and short is, Valve's deal isn't very beneficial for the mod authors.
Even if you ignore the 25% / 75% financial distribution.
Valve provides little to no support to the table.

They expect a mod author to work at the level of a professional game developer and be fully informed already.
They also expect the mod author to solve all issues.
Valve takes a complete hands-off approach and won't even remove a mod if the author requests it "Unless legally forced to."

Lets face it. Would you pay for a mod if you did not have the guarantee that it work work?
Knowing full well that the refund policy isn't the ideal solution and that Valve reserves the right to retract your access to it at any given time should they 'suspect foul play'?

Valve / Steam Workshop also lacks most tools that the average mod user will need once the game gets modded beyond a certain point.
Again, Valve has shown little to no inclination to invest here.
Otherwise they would've gone ahead and provided such support beforehand. Edited April 25, 2015 by danjal

[danjal]

In response to post #24628239.

Leash786 wrote:

The terms under which mod authors have to enter to work with Steam Workshop aren't necessarily ideal right now...

They are relying on ignorance on behalf of most mod authors to rush into this for a quick buck. The first casualties have already fallen.
Most mod authors are hobbyists.
Selling a mod moves you from a hobbyist into the field of professional software developer.
The strings that attach are numerous and Valve isn't providing much (if any) support.

[Leash786]

In response to post #24624259. #24624584, #24624889, #24625014, #24625214, #24625334, #24625614, #24625804, #24625999 are all replies on the same post.

ltp777 wrote:

cTuck88 wrote: "Without that incentive, future games may only support mods via Steam."

This is my biggest concern of this whole ordeal. What happens if the publishers and developers see this as a potential for extra cash flow and do start putting in DRM-like gates to force all mods through Steam? Free sites like the Nexus would be targeted by these companies and would have the legal hammer dropped down hard. Modding anarchists would find ways around said DRM-like ways, but that would push the modding scene underground and make us (in the corporate eye) no better than pirates.

digitaltrucker wrote: That future is likely to happen in any case. And if (when) it does, any unauthorized modder will be no different than someone who torrented the original game.

Foedawg wrote: The hell are you talking about?

digitaltrucker wrote: What am I talking about? It's entirely possible (perhaps inevitable?) that a Steam exclusive game will only be allowed to run mods that originate on Steam. If or when that happens, playing said game with a mod from somewhere other than Steam will be considered piracy because the player would have to have either a cracked game or cracked client to run it.

See?

WightMage wrote: What if, much like a market for games with no DRM, there was now a demand for games that allowed you to use mods from any website?

Jsmorris14 wrote: This is what I fear.

My personal opinion, the next Elder Scrolls or Fallout will have this feature.

digitaltrucker wrote: I suddenly have a bad feeling about this special press conference Bethesda is throwing at the beginning of E3. As soon as I heard about it, I knew it was going to revolve around something REALLY significant. That's just too much money to spend to announce some games. Let's face it, FO:4 or TESVI don't need much hype.

Jsmorris14 wrote: Funny my brother and I were talking about that earlier today. Beth touches the creation kit after years, this all happens yesterday with the paid workshop. I think they could be testing the waters to see how people would react to this before just dropping the bomb at E3.

It makes sense, to keep nexus intact we'll all going to have to pay something, even if it's only a dollar a download . . .

[Exoclyps]

In response to post #24607884. #24609519, #24609764, #24609799, #24610159, #24610764 are all replies on the same post.

Draugas wrote:

bblair0099 wrote: Most people don't understand how this will affect future games like say Fallout 4, if it even happens now.

Draugas wrote: Yep. If this is even moderately successful, prepare to pay for Modding Tools DLC and Workshop only release permission behind payments.

Mindprobe24 wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CbWr0zO7Ac

Leros wrote: Modding tools will never be DLC, especially not if they want to make money off mods, because that would limit the userbase they could earn money from.

Do you even capitalism?

zanity wrote: Fallout 4 is FULLY entitled to offer paywall only modding as an option if Zenimax properly deal with all the legal issues (unlike the situation with Skyrim). Indeed, as an experiment such a move will be welcome by more forward thinking people, since the Internet frequently discovers new business models that no-one previously realised were a good idea.

The problem today is that many people are CONFUSED as to why paid Skyrim modding is an obscenity- and thus use an 'entitlement' argument to bemoan the coming paid modding for Fallout 4.

Like it or not, Zenimax if fully entitled to choose what it does IN THE FUTURE. What Zenimax is NOT entitled to do is build a community for years under one set of rules, and suddenly HARVEST that community for commercial gain by changing the rules retrospectively. Wasn't that the dreadful intention of the 'bad guys' in Jupiter Ascending?

It would be intriguing to see Zenimax properly handle fully legal paid modding for a future title. Zenimax would surely have to buy the rights of all emerging tools used as 'dependencies' by end-user mods, so mod authors would have a growing library of tools and resources at their disposal. Zenimax would also have to take legal responsibility for QUALITY CONTROL, and that would be a wonder to behold.

That is also something I'm afraid of. I hope they won't do it, as it'd destroy the community and would essentially stop the expansion of modding. However, people wouldn't mod for future games as few would bother get the mods if it's behind a paywall.

[Leash786]

In response to post #24628239. #24628454 is also a reply to the same post.

Leash786 wrote:

danjal wrote: The terms under which mod authors have to enter to work with Steam Workshop aren't necessarily ideal right now...

They are relying on ignorance on behalf of most mod authors to rush into this for a quick buck. The first casualties have already fallen.
Most mod authors are hobbyists.
Selling a mod moves you from a hobbyist into the field of professional software developer.
The strings that attach are numerous and Valve isn't providing much (if any) support.

A totally different ball game . . . unexpected tax bills etc . . .

[Milleuros]

This whole argument reminds me a lot of the debate about DLCs back then.

 

Maybe some of you remember that. Back then it was normal that developers added new content to the game as "updates", or "patches". New maps, new tools, game extension, and so on and so forth.

 

Back when the first DLC were made, we could read arguments such that : "Now that they are paid they will be more willing to produce large scale high quality content !" and "This only means that there will be two types of content : free, same as today, and paid. Overall we'll get more content."

 

Today we notice how wrong they were. Most, if not all developers have released as paid DLC a content that would in the past have been released as an update.

At the same time, the "base content" of the game has decreased in terms of quantity (and arguably quality) such that having an acceptable content now requires to buy DLCs.

 

On this mod affair, some of you keep saying that there will be bigger mods because people will now be able to sell them.

Some others say that there will always be high-quality free mods.

 

The example of DLCs and expansions should show you how wrong you are to think it will happen.

 

 

On mod quality, you just have to browse popular games on ModDb to see that mods with more content than full-games are common. Project Reality for Battlefield 2, Desert Combat for Battlefield 1942, to name two examples that I know pretty well.

[Warrior84]

As I understand it when you "sell" mods you only receive money to your steam wallet. If so, then this is worse than donations, in which you receive REAL money, and can decide to do whatever you want with it. With steam wallet money you can ONLY use it on steam, you cannot convert it to real currency. And when you do decide to buy a game with that money, it is Valve again who receives a cut from it, AGAIN.

 

Only the big companies benefit from this, the modders only receive pocket change. So e.g if you sell something for $5 and then deduct 75% from it, how much money do you get? Barely anything.

 

Why don't people get this?

 

This whole thing is so wrong.

 

[Shurah]

That's a very bad timing for Isoku, because my mod is going to kill his paid version of Wet&Cold. Here the preview of my mod: http://forums.nexusmods.com/index.php?/topic/2750729-immersive-citizens-ai-overhaul-wip/

[greentea101]

In response to post #24626989.

shingouki2002 wrote:

Sounds like a good idea to me, I hope this post gets seen.

[Meracos]

Forbes Magazine weighs in on the Paid Mod concept:

 

"Valve's Paid 'Skyrim' Mods Are A Legal, Ethical And Creative Disaster"

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2015/04/24/valves-paid-skyrim-mods-are-a-legal-ethical-and-creative-disaster/#